convergence, divergence or converging divergence?
if the state of our world could be expressed as a mathematical formula, could it be expressed in 1 formula or would more than 1 formula be necessary? and if it can be expressed by 1 formula, would the answer approach unity (convergence) or infinity (divergence) as time approaches infinity? however, if the multiple equations that model the state of our world cannot be reduced to a single equation, but to a few equations, would each of those equations approach unity (converging divergence)?
i realise that i might appear to have imbibed some controlled substance and am rambling away, but let's try and express the above in real, tangible form...
let us just look at it in terms of business organisations. with the rhetoric of "synergy" being bandied about, lots of mergers occur on a regular basis. extending that logic fully, would it be wrong to assume that the most amount of synergy can be created if ALL businesses were run by 1 body? of course for such an event to occur, lots of what seem like improbable conditions need to exist. one of them being the lack of competition.. or 1 competitor gaining such a large competitive advantage that the rest are left biting the dust.
another scenario is similar to the state we have now, except on a larger scale. pluralism being the keyword. lots of individual businesses, operating independent of one another. rationally speaking, not the most advantageous situation, since concepts such as economies of scale cannot be exploited to their full potential. but we've also gotta bear in mind that humans aren't very rational.
the third scenario would be a hybrid of the above 2 scenarios. having 1 global organisation would probably be very unwieldy and would suffer a whole lot of inertia. and having too many individual entities in operation would create unnecessary conflict, and unnecessary overlap. hopefully taking the best of both scenarios, a few organisations would exist. in such a scenario, the organisations would all have almost mutually exclusive spheres of influence, thus leading to almost nil competition between the organisations.
so, what will it be? 1 gigantic enitity, numerous small entities or a few medium sized entities?
[edit: my inspiration for the above post was a scene from "in good company", where the guy who takes over the company dennis quaid is working at makes a speech on synergy, and on an irrelevant point of note, i do think that scarlett johansson is really droolsome.]
i realise that i might appear to have imbibed some controlled substance and am rambling away, but let's try and express the above in real, tangible form...
let us just look at it in terms of business organisations. with the rhetoric of "synergy" being bandied about, lots of mergers occur on a regular basis. extending that logic fully, would it be wrong to assume that the most amount of synergy can be created if ALL businesses were run by 1 body? of course for such an event to occur, lots of what seem like improbable conditions need to exist. one of them being the lack of competition.. or 1 competitor gaining such a large competitive advantage that the rest are left biting the dust.
another scenario is similar to the state we have now, except on a larger scale. pluralism being the keyword. lots of individual businesses, operating independent of one another. rationally speaking, not the most advantageous situation, since concepts such as economies of scale cannot be exploited to their full potential. but we've also gotta bear in mind that humans aren't very rational.
the third scenario would be a hybrid of the above 2 scenarios. having 1 global organisation would probably be very unwieldy and would suffer a whole lot of inertia. and having too many individual entities in operation would create unnecessary conflict, and unnecessary overlap. hopefully taking the best of both scenarios, a few organisations would exist. in such a scenario, the organisations would all have almost mutually exclusive spheres of influence, thus leading to almost nil competition between the organisations.
so, what will it be? 1 gigantic enitity, numerous small entities or a few medium sized entities?
[edit: my inspiration for the above post was a scene from "in good company", where the guy who takes over the company dennis quaid is working at makes a speech on synergy, and on an irrelevant point of note, i do think that scarlett johansson is really droolsome.]
